E 
1857 



tN 54 



AN 




ORATION 



%■ 



DELIVERED ON THE 



PUBLIC SQUARE AT NEW HAVEN, 



THE REQUEST OF ITS CITIZENS, 



JULY 4, 1851, 



HIRAM KETCHUM, ESQ. 



NEW HAVEN : 
THOMAS J. STAFFORD, PRINTER. 

1851. 




Glass. 



>^ Cj \g 






A3^ 


ORATION, 


DELIVERED ON THE 


PUBLIC SQUARE AT NEW HAVEN, 


AT \ 


1 

THE REQUEST OF ITS CITIZENS, 


JULY 4, 1851, 


BY 


HIRAM KETCHUM, ESQ. 


NEW HAVEN: 


THOMAS J. STAFFORD, PRINTER. 


1851. 






i J Co 3 6 



New Haven, June lltli. ISal. 
Hiram Ketchum, Esq. 

Dear Sir,— 

The undersigned have been appointed a Commit- 
tee to procure an Orator to address the people of New Haven on the 4th of 
July. Among several distinguished names, yours has been particularly mentioned, 
and the Committee have agreed to invite you to accept of the appointment. 

On an ordinary occasion of this kind, we shf)uld hardly expect to obtain a gentle- 
man of your distinction in a laborious and absorbing profession. But our people 
seem determined to make an unusual demon.stration, and we think it a rare oppor- 
tunity, in the present state of the public mind on great national questions, to make 
a salutary and enduring impression in regard to our great duties to the Union, the 
Constitution, and the Laws. 

We hope you will take the subject into consideration, on the score of patriotic 
duty, and be able to give us a favorable answer. 

Respectfully Yours, 

A. N. SKINNER, ) 

JONATHAN STODDARD, [ Committee. 
CHAS. ATWATER, Jun. ) 



New York, June 13th, 1851. 
Gentlemen, — 

I received yesterday your letter of the. 11th inst. inviting me, on behalf 
of a Committee appointed by the Citizens of New Haven, to address the people 
of tliat City on the 4th of July ensuing. 

I accept the invitation. This is the first time I have ever consented to deliver a 
4t)i of July Oration, and it ill suits my convenience to do it now; but the time has 
come, in my judgment, when every Republican in the land ought profoundly to 
consider tlie duties of an American citizen, and if he has anything to say, to com- 
municate it when a fitting occasion presents. There can be no occasion more fitting 
for this purpose than the celebration of the day when the independence of our 
country was declared. 

If there be any place where I should feel a diffidence in expressing my views on 
public topics, it would be in New Haven, whose inhabitants are known to possess 
xmusual intelligence, and whose learned institutions are filled with scholars and 
philosophers of a world-wide reputation ; still I shall do the best my circumstances 
allow. 

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant and fellow citizen, 

HIRAM KETCHUM. 
A. N. Skinner, Jno. Stoddard, Chas. Atwater, Jun. 



New Haven-, July 5th, 1851. 
HiRAJi Ketchum, Esq. 

Dear Sir, — 

The assemblage that heard your address on the 
4th, on the Public Square in New Haven, expressed then- desire to sec it in print, 
by a unanimous vote. 

Acting in their behalf, we thank you for your sound, able, and eloquent argu- 
ment, and request a copy for publication. 

With great regard, we are, 

Respectfully Yours, 

A. N. SKINNER, ) 

HENRY DUTTON, [ Committee. 

JONATHAN STODDARD, ) 



New York, July 11th, 1851. 
Gentlemen, — 

I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your favor of the 5th instant, 
requesting, on behalf of the assemblage who heard my remarks on the Public Square 
in New Haven, the day preceding, a copy of them for publication. 

By the aid furnished by your faithful reporter of those remarks, and my own 
notes, I am enabled to comply with yom- request, substantially, and do so with great 
pleasure. My own convictions of right and duty, in respect to the great question 
of the day, are very clear ; and I desire, above all things, to have no misunder- 
standings with that class of the community with whom I usually act. 

Will you allow me, gentlemen, to tender to you, and through you, the citizens of 
New Haven, my thanks for the great civilities and kindness extended to me on my 
recent visit to that city. 

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, 

Your friend and fellow citizen, 

HHIAM KETCHUM. 
A. N. Skinner, Henry Dutton, and Jonathan Stoddard, Esqs. 



ORATIOI, &c. 



PuAYER having been oft'eied by the Rev. Mr. ISToreis, and the Declaration of In- 
dependence read by the Hon. Charles H. Pond, recently Lieutenant Governor of 
Connecticut, His Honor, Aaron N. Skinner, Mayor of the City of New Haven, 
introduced the Orator of the day to the large audience, which, notwithstanding the 
falling rain, had gathered upon the Northern portico and steps of the State House, 
and upon the gentle hill-side below, as follows : — 

Fellow Citizens : I have the honor to introduce to you the Hon. HIRAM 
KETCHUM of New York, who has consented, at your invitation, through your 
Committee, to come here on this occasion, at much private inconvenience, from a 
sense of duty and love of country, to address you on interesting subjects connected 
with this hallowed day. I need not ask of you for him, your most respectful 
attention. 

Mr. Ketchum then came forward, and after the applause with which he was 
enthusiastically greeted had subsided, remarked : 

Fellow Citizens : 

It is seventy-five years to day, three quarters of a cen- 
tury, since tlie United States of America declared themselves 
independent, and claimed admission into the Family of Nations. 
I shall take occasion, in my remarks to-day, to notice some of 
the consequences which have resulted from this great transac- 
tion ; but at present, I shall revert to one only. 

The declaration of national independence has had a tendency 
to beget and foster a strong and decided feeling of personal in- 
dependence. The right of private judgment is here recog- 
nized ; every man feels that he has an interest in the govern- 
ment, and that he is entitled to a voice in the administration, 
preservation, and, if needs be, the alteration of that govern- 
ment. The American mind too, has cast off many, perhaps too 
many, restraints ; it investigates boldly ; it is unwilling to sub- 
mit to mere authority ; it demands a reason for every rule of 



action prescribed for its government ; it does not say even to 
the law of the land, " what thou bidst unargued I obey, so God 
ordains ;" but it claims the right to question, to argue, and to 
investigate, 

I cannot better illustrate my meaning, than by describing the 
actual state of feeling now prevalent in this country. Some- 
thing more than sixty years ago, the federal Union was formed 
by the adoption of the present Constitution. Since that time, 
and as the result of the Union, the advancement and prosperity 
of the people of this country have been unparalleled. Our 
numbers and resources have increased almost beyond compu- 
tation. Besides the multiplication of our own native inhabit- 
ants, thousands and hundreds of thousands have sought our 
shores from the continent of Europe, and found here prosper- 
ous and happy homes. Now we have extended ourselves to 
the Pacific, and the genius of American liberty, standing on 
the shore of that mighty ocean, invites the down trodden millions 
of Asia to partake the fruits of our liberty. At this time, when 
our mission of beneficence to the whole human race is just exhib- 
iting its most valuable triumphs, there are many persons in this 
country who question the utility of the Union, and indeed 
denounce it as the enemy of liberty. There are those here, 
both at the North and South, who would destroy this Union. 
Under these circumstances, what shall the friends of the Union 
do ? There are those among us at the North, themselves pro- 
fessing to be friends of the Union, who say — do nothing. Are 
these persons sincere ? Let us see. 

In the year 1830, the State of South Carolina being dissat- 
isfied with some of the revenue laws, designed for the protection, 
incidentally or otherwise, of American manufactures, claimed 
a right to nullify an act of Congress, and thus dissolve the 
Union. This right to nullify was asserted and advocated with 
great plausibility, on the floor of the Senate, but it was met by 
a distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, Daniel Webster, 
who, by one of those intellectual efforts, which characterize 
the age, overthrew the heresy, and held it up to the contempt 
of the country. What was the result of this effort, in its ope- 
ration upon Mr, Webster himself? Was he told that his labor 



. was unnecessary — that the nullifiers were not worth attention ? 
Oh no ! far otherwise. All through the Northern States, certainly, 
he was lauded to the skies, by many of those too, who now pre- 
tend that the seceders and higher law gentlemen are not worthy 
of notice. Daniel Webster was then, and for his great effort 
in defense of the Union, hailed as the defender of the Con- 
stitution. But when in the year of our Lord 1850, twenty 
years subsequent, true to the character which he had established, 
and the title he had received, he deemed it his duty to say to 
the people of the free States, that they were not faithful to the 
Constitution ; then it was quite a different matter — then he was 
told, " Mr. Defender of the Constitution, this is more than we 
bargained for. (Laughter.) We meant that you should ex- 
pose and denounce the South when it attempted to violate the 
Constitution ; but we regard you as a Northern man ; we do 
not authorize you to censure, much less to rebuke — oh no ! If 
you presume to put yourself in opposition to us, we shall brand 
you a traitor and a dough face." 

We have men at the North, who openly avow their intention 
not to obey the law of the land ; we have men at the South, 
who are endeavoring to secede from the Union. Now the 
question is — what is our duty, who believe that the preservation 
of this Union is essential to the very existence of liberty ? 
Shall we be silent ? Shall we be dumb when sounds of disso- 
lution fill the air ? Far otherwise. Our liberty, as well as our 
religion, rest upon certain great fundamental principles, and 
our only security is — when these principles are assailed — to de- 
fend them. We must resist the beginning of opposition, the 
very first assaults upon that which we hold valuable beyond 
all estimation. We must keep our armor on, and be ready to 
contend for the faith which is within us, and the principles 
which we hold invaluable, at all times and on all occasions. 
(Enthusiastic cheers.) 

[The Mayor here requested the audience to close their um- 
brellas, remarking that they had been paying the orator a great 
compliment, having been so interested in his discourse that they 
had not observed that it had stopped raining.] 

Fellow citizens, we shall have to commune together a little 



while, and if you will give your patience, I will give my voice 
any how. (Laughter.) 

The time has come when it is necessary that the foundations 
of those institutions which furnish securities to American lib- 
erty, should be reexamined ; should be tested again by reason 
and argument, and, for one, I am not afraid of such investiga- 
tion, believing that after it is made in the most thorough man- 
ner, we shall only regard and cherish our institutions, and espe- 
cially our Union, more than we ever did before. 

Let us then go back to the very beginning of our government. 
What right had the people of the thirteen colonies to raise the 
standard of revolution, and cast off the government under 
which they were born, and to which many of them had sworn 
allegiance ? This was a question which our fathers long and 
anxiously considered. They were a Christian people, who re- 
cognized civil government as an ordinance of God, which they 
were bound to obey, not only for the fear of the penalties de- 
nounced against disobedience, but for conscience sake ; because 
obedience had been enjoined by God himself. But at the same 
time that they regarded government as a divine ordinance, they 
had been well instructed in the principles of English liberty, 
and they knew that there were bounds, which the government 
itself could not lawfully transgress, and they knew too that the 
right existed in the governed to change their form of govern- 
ment. This had been exemplified in the history of the mother 
country. They knew that the right to hold and enjoy, and 
dispose of private property, was one which no government 
could rightfully violate — their property could not be taken from 
them without their consent ; and because the British govern- 
ment insisted on the right to take it when the colonists had no 
voice in that government, they rebelled. But even when they 
knew they were the subjects of oppression and injustice, they 
did not forcibly resist until they had well considered and fa- 
vorably decided these two questions: — 1. Can we succeed? 
2. Will success enure, upon the whole, to the benefit of the peo- 
ple ? If, in a calm, dispassionate view of the case, these questions 
could not be answered in the affirmative, the right of resistance 
did not exist, it had not accrued. Hence our forefathers pro- 



9 

ceeded with great caution and circumspection ; they were not 
fanatics, but were sagacious and far-seeing ; they hastened slowly 
and bided their time. They remonstrated humbly and earn- 
estly — they resisted in the first instance, on the ground that 
they could rightfully do so, according to the principles of the 
British Constitution. They again remonstrated ; the Repre- 
sentatives in Congress appealed to the people. Will you allow 
me to read a short address from Congress to the people, made 
at that time— on the 28th day of April, A. D. 1775 ? 

" We conjure you, by all that is dear, by all that is sacred, that you give all as- 
sistance possible in forming the army. Our all is at stake. Death and devastation 
are the certain consequences of delay. Every moment is infinitely precious. An 
hour lost may deluge your country in blood, and entail perpetual slavery upon the 
few of your posterity which may survive the carnage. We beg and entreat as you 
will answer it to your country, to your conscience, and above all, as you will an- 
swer it to God himself, that you will hasten and encourage, by all possible means, 
the enlistment of men to form the army ; and send them forward to head-quarters 
at Cambridge, with that expedition which the vast importance and instant urgency 
of the affair demand." 

What says the faithful historian ? " This address was at- 
tended to ; the men discovered a readiness to turn out for the 
salvation of their country, and the women applied themselves 
with cheerfulness to the fitting out of their husbands, fathers, 
and brothers, for the important expedition, while the dangers of 
it were overlooked or disregarded." 

This address was thus received by the American people, 
and when it was ascertained by the Continental Congress 
that the spirit of the people was right, that the men were 
ready to die for liberty, and the women — God bless them — 
to give up their fathers, husbands, brothers, and sons, to 
fight the battles of their country, regardless of all consequen- 
ces — when they discovered this — when they found that they 
had strength to carry out their designs, then, and not till then, 
did they put forth that Declaration — to the reading of which 
you have just attended — and bravely did they maintain it. 
Suppose they had failed — suppose they had been overcome — 
don't you see that glorious Declaration would have been noth- 
ing but a laughing stock ? We are in the habit very much of 
commending this Declaration. It was drawn up bv a Commit- 

2 



10 

tee of Congress — JefTerson himself was the actual instrument- 
ality ; but there is nothing novel in the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence. Why, our fathers were perfectly familiar with the 
principles which it contains. They are beautifully put to- 
gether, but these principles themselves were as familiar as house- 
hold words. Farmers discussed them ; mechanics discussed 
them ; professional men discussed them ; the clergy — God bless 
them — discussed them from the pulpit. The question whether 
the time had come to revolt from the government under which 
they were born, was anxiously discussed, and by none more 
than New England and the men of New England. The ques- 
tion was carried by them, where all important questions should 
be carried — they consulted the Being unto whom all hearts are 
open; and they decided, the pulpit decided, religious men deci- 
ded, that it was right — that it was just — and, by the blessing of 
Almighty God, they would be free! And that declaration was 
maintained, until at length the time arrived when the enemy 
was driven from our shores. The British government acknowl- 
edged the independence which we ourselves had declared ; but, 
my fellow citizens, mark it — mark it ! this was but the begin- 
ning of the contest. Now the great question arose, how shall 
we preserve the liberty which has been acquired? That was 
the question which disturbed all minds at this time ; and, if you 
will allow me — 1 know it is somewhat unpleasant to hear the 
reading of extracts — I will read a few extracts from Washing- 
ton, indicating the feeling which pervaded the country at that 
time. Washington ! whose image is here, [pointing to a 
large marble bust of " the Father of his Country" near him 
on the platform, which was followed by loud applause,] and I 
will give you his inscription. We are not at liberty to make 
to ourselves graven images and worship them, but we are at lib- 
erty to cherish in our heart of hearts, the principles entertained 
by such men as Washington, (cheers,) and I hope will cherish 
them ; I hope you will listen to them with a reverence only 
second to divine inspiration; I hope you will not only listen, 
but teach the lessons of wisdom to your children and children's 
children. The first extract I will read you, is contained in a 
letter from Washington to Hamilton, under date of March 
4th, 1783 



11 

" For it is clearly my opinion, unless Congress have powers competent to all gen- 
eral purposes, that the distresses we have incurred, and the blood we have S|)ilt, 
will avail us nothing." 

The second is from a letter from the same, to the same, dated 
March 31, 1783. 

"No man in the United States is or can be more deeply impressed with the ne- 
cessity of a reform in our confederation, than myself. No man perha])s has felt 
the bad effects of it more sensibly ; for to the defects thereof and want of power 
in Congress, may be justly ascribed ihe prolongation of the war, and consequently, 
the expenses occasioned by it." 

He wrote to La Fa3'ette about the same time, April 5, 1783. 

" We are now an independent people, and have yet to learn political tactics. We 
are placed among the nations of the earth, and have a character to establish ; but 
how we shall acquit ourselves, time must discover. 

" To avert these evils, to form a new constitution, that will give consistency, sta- 
bility, and dignity to the Union, and sufficient powers to the great council of the 
nation for general purposes, is a duty incumbent upon every man who wishes well 
to his country, and will meet every aid, as far as it can be rendered in the private 
walks of life." 

But on taking leave of the army, June 8th, 1783, when Wash- 
ington thought he was taking leave of public life forever ; and, 
let me say, Washington was then only fifty-one years of age, yet 
he was very anxious to get out of public life ; but, with the 
greatest deference, let me say, he had no right to retire at fitty- 
one ; so his countrymen thought, and they kept him at work. 
(Merriment.) When about retiring, he addressed what he 
thought was his last official act, to the governors of the respect- 
ive States. Will you allow me to read a few extracts from this 
address, dated June 8th, 1783 ? 

" For, according to the system of policy the States shall adopt at this moment, 
they will stand or fall ; and by their confirmation or lapse it is yet to be decided, 
whether the revolution must ultimately be considered a blessing or a curse ; a bless- 
ing or a curse, not to the present age alone, for with our fate will the destiny of 
unborn millions be involved. 

"There are four things, which, I humbly conceive, arc essential to the well being, 
I may even venture to say, to the existence of the United States, as an independ- 
ent power : 

Firxt. — An indissoluble union of the States under one federal head. 

Second. — A sacred regard to public justice. 

Third. — The adoption of a proper peace establishment. 

Fourth. — The prevalence of that pacific and friendly' disposition among the peo- 



12 

pie of the United States, which will induce them to forget their local prejudices 
and policies ; to make those mutual concessions which are requisite to the general 
prosperity ; and, in some instances, to sacrifice their individual advantages to the 
interests of the community." — Washington's circular to the State Governors on dis- 
banding the army. 

Washington to James McHenry, in Congress, August 22, 
1785. 

" I confess to you candidly, that I can foresee no evil greater than disunion ; than 
those unreasonable jealousies, (I say unreasonable, because I would, I have a. proper 
jealousy always awake, and the United States on the watch to prevent individual 
States from infracting the Constitution with impunity,) which are continually 
poisoning our minds and filling them with imaginary evils for the prevention of 
real ones." 

To James Madison, November 5, 1786. 

" Fain would I hope, that the greatest and most important of all subjects, the 
federal Government, may be considered with that calm and deliberate attention 
which the magnitude of it so critically and loudly calls for. Let prejudices, unrea- 
sonable jealousies, and local interests, yield to reason and liberality. Let us look 
to our national character, and to things beyond the present moment. No morn 
ever dawned more favorably than ours did — and uo day was ever more clouded 
than the present. Wisdom and good examples are necessary at this time to rescue 
the political machine from the impending storm." 

Again, November 5, 1786. 

" How melancholy is the reflection, that in so short a time we should have made 
such large strides towards fulfilling the predictions of our transatlantic foes ! 
' Leave them to themselves, and their government will soon dissolve.' Will not 
the wise and good strive hard to avert this evil? Or will their supineness suffer 
ignorance, and the arts of self-interested, designing, disaflected, and desperate char- 
actei's, to involve this great country in wretchedness and contempt ? 

" Thirteen Sovereignties pulling against each other, and all tugging at the Federal 
head, will soon bring ruin on the whole." 

To David Stewart, July 1, 1787. 

" Weak at home and disregarded abroad is our present condition, and contempti- 
ble enough it is." 

Now, my friends, you see that from the time peace was de- 
clared, up to the time of the formation of the new Constitution, 
Washington feared, constantly feared, we were about to lose 
all we had gained by the Revolution ; that for the want of a 
good government, our union would be a mere rope of sand ; 
that for the want of a federal government which should unite 



13 

us under one head, we were about to lose every thing ; that we 
were about to fall to pieces and realize the predictions of our 
transatlantic foes. His constant aim v/as to get the people to 
frame a more perfect union. 

A Convention met in September, 1786, at Annapolis, for the 
purpose of taking measures with respect to trade. Very few 
States were represented ; Connecticut not at all ; there was 
not, I believe, a delegate from any of the New England States. 
The Convention did nothingr but recommend that a Convention 

O 

should be called with fuller powers, and represent all the States. 
It was called ; it contained representatives from all the States. 
The Convention met in May, 1787, and continued until Sep- 
tember. From May to September they were deliberating all 
the time and preparing the Constitution under which we all 
live. You know that Washington was at the head — that Wash- 
ington was its President — the ablest man of any age or country. 
Franklin was also a member, and Hamilton, and Madison, and 
Sherman of this State, and Ellsworth, and a host of other wor- 
thies. They labored with untiring zeal. They did not make 
speeches as members of Congress now do, to be reported and 
read by their constituents ; [laughter,] but they labored for re- 
sults. Their speeches were not published till long afterwards, 
when they were brought out by Mr. Madison. It is important 
we should fully understand the character of the Convention, in 
order to appreciate the Constitution which was the work of 
their hands. Will you allow me to read a speech, which is the 
best almost ever made by any man. It is a speech by Dr. 
Franklin ; no doubt many of you have read it before ; but I 
doubt not it will be refreshing to hear it again. He was at the 
time of its delivery, eighty years old, and he had never forgot- 
ten a good thing which had occurred in the course of a long 
experience. You know his history. He remarked — 

"Mr. President, the small progress that we have made after four or five weeks' 
close attendance and contmual reasonings with each other — our ditferent sentiments 
on almost every question, several cf the last producing as many noes as ayes — is, 
mcthinks, a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the human understanding. 
We, indeed, seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been run- 
ning about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of 
government, and examined the different forms of those republics which, having been 



14 

formed with the seeds of (heir own dissolution, now no longer exist. And we have 
viewed modern States, all around Europe, but tiud none of their constitutions suita- 
ble to our circumstances. 

" In the situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find politi- 
cal truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it liap- 
pened, sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Fa- 
ther of lights, to illumine our understandings ? In the beginning of the contest with 
Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room 
for the Divine protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard, and they were graciously 
answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle, must have observed fre- 
quent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor. To that kind Provi- 
dence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of estab- 
lishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful 
Friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, 
sir, a long time, and the longer I live, I see more couvincing proofs of this truth — 
that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the 
ground without His notice, is it probable tliat an empire can rise without His 
aid ? We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings, that ' except the Lord 
build the house, they labor in vain that build it.' I firmly believe this ; and I 
also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political build- 
ing no better than the builders of Babel. We shall be divided by our little j)artial, 
local interests; our projects will be confounded; and we ourselves shall become a 
reproach and by-word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may 
hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by 
human wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest. 

" I therefore beg leave to move — that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance 
of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every 
morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy in this 
city be requested to officiate in that service. 

"Mr. Sherman seconded the motion." 

The Convention succeeded in presenting a form of Constitu- 
tion. It was reported to Congress. Congress submitted it to 
the States ; the States were to call conventions and ratify or not 
the Constitution, as they chose. You know the history ; these 
States had conventions, and in these conventions were the ablest 
men of the day. They deliberated upon every article and upon 
every clause in the Constitution, and after weeks and months of 
anxious deliberation, they at last adopted the form of govern- 
ment under which we now live. Now, w^ill you allow me to 
trouble you with one or two more extracts from Washington, 
written after this work was done ? He writes — 

To Patrick Henry, afterwards Governor of Virginia, Sept. 24, 1*787. 
" I wish the Constitution, which is offered, had been more perfect ; but I sincere- 
ly believe it is the best that could be obtained at this time. 



15 

" From a variety of concurring accounts it appears to me, that the political con- 
cerns of this country are in a manner suspended by a thread, and that the conven- 
tion has been looked up to, by the reflecting part of the community, with a solicitude 
which is hardly to be conceived ; and, if nothing had been agreed upon by that 
body, quarreling would have ensued, the seeds being deeply sown in every soil." 

To Edtii'ind Randolph, Governor of Virginia, Jan. 8, 1778. 
"Tliere are some things in the new form, I will readily acknowledge, which nev- 
er did, and I am persuaded never will, obtain my cordial approbation ; but I did 
then conceive, and do now most firmly believe, that in the aggregate it is the best 
Constitution that can be obtained at this epoch, and that this or a dissolution of the 
Union awaits our choice, and is the only alternative before us." 

To Benjamin Lincoln, June 29, 1788. 
" Mr. Henry, the great leader of it, [the opposition,] has signified, that, though 
he can never be reconciled to the Constitution in its present form, and shall give it 
every constitutional opposition in his power, yet he will submit to it peaceably, as 
he thinks every good citizen ought to do when it is in exercise, and that he will, 
both by precept and example, inculcate this doctrine on all around him." 

To Gov. Trumbull, July 20, 1788. 
" "We may, with a kind of pious and grateful exultation, trace the Providence 
through those dark and mysterious events, which first induced the States to appoint a 
general convention, and then led them, one after another, by such steps as were 
best calculated to effect the object, into an adoption of the system recommended 
by that general convention ; thereby in all human probability laying a lasting 
foundation for tranquillity and happiness, where we had but too much reason to fear 
that confusion and misery were coming rapidly upon us." 

Now, then, you see the Constitution was adopted. You see 
how Washington speaks of it. Yet the Constitution liad its op- 
ponents ; it had its opponents in the convention at Philadelphia ; 
it had its opponents ainong respectable men, and Patrick Henry 
was one of these respectable men ; it had its opponents among 
those outside of the convention — but a majority adopted it. 
Now I put this question to you — would it have been right for 
these opponents of this Constitution at that time, the moment it 
was adopted, to bring forward before the people agitating topics 
and keep the community in perfect turmoil upon points that 
had been settled ? I put it to you. Patrick Henry opposed it, 
George Clinton, Governor of New York, opposed the Constitu- 
tion. The Constitution provided for alterations and amend- 
ments. A perfect legal right existed in every man ; but was it 
the part of patriotism, when the country had been agitated week 
after week, and month after month, to bring up these subjects 



16 

of excitement — and one of the principal subjects was the ques- 
tion of slavery ? Why, no, said Patrick Henry, I will give the 
Constitution a fair trial ; I was opposed to it, but I will give it 
a fair trial — and every patriotic man in the country deemed it 
his duty to forbear his right to agitate, and to submit and give 
the Constitution a fair trial before the people. Why, gentlemen, 
can there be any doubt that this was the duty of patriotism ? 
Who disputes the right of any man to agitate on the subject ? 
Why, yonder I can imagine there lives an honorable husband 
and an honorable wife — one a high-toned Presbyterian, as blue as 
possible, (laughter,) and the other a high Churchman. Don't you 
think each would have a perfect right to discuss the principles 
and peculiarities of their different creeds and modes of worship ? 
Who denies it ? To speak on religious subjects is a sacred right. 
If the wife thinks the only way to get to heaven is through a 
church that has a bishop, and gets into a dispute with her hus- 
band every morning at the breakfast table, how long do you 
think the union would be worth preserving? (Vociferous laugh- 
ter and cheers.) You will not be slow to make the application. 

In 1850 occurred the longest session of Congress that ever 
Mras held. Speech after speech was made by northern men 
against southern men, and by southern men against northern 
men. These speeches were printed, sent home and read, and they 
influenced the South against the North and the North against 
the South, for month after month, far more than the people were 
influenced during the discussions of the convention that framed 
the Constitution. Any one looking on, as I was a year ago in 
Washington, at the bad feeling kept alive by incessant irritation, 
would have thought the Union on the very verge of dissolution. 
How can you dissolve the Union ? If Congress breaks up in a 
passion and public business is stopped by passion, the nation is 
dissolved ; the machinery has stopped ; it won't work — then 
there is an end of it. 

What was done ? In Congress there were some old men — 
some able men of all sides and of all political parties — and they 
conferred together ; they said, come. Jet us compromise this 
difference, this talking — this incessant irritation ; let us labor in 
season and out of season, and let us not cease till we quiet the 



troubled sea, and harmony and brotherly feeling are restored. 
With the utmost difficulty the disturbing questions were settled 
by a series of measures not satisfactory to all. Washington 
tells us there were some things in the Constitution which were 
not settled to his satisfaction. I will not discuss the question, 
which gained the most by the compromise, the north or the 
south ; you can discuss that as well as I ; but if freedom did not 
gain most, I know nothing about it. Now what ought we to do ? 
Shall we have the fight over again? Ah ! but says my friend in 
one corner of this crowd, do you deny my right to aid in the 
alteration of this law that I don't approve of? Do you deny my 
right to discuss the subject ? God forbid that I should deny 
your right to do this, but I say, as a prudent, patriotic Ameri- 
can — be still ; say nothing now ; let it work, and let us see 
what the practical operation of the law is, before we begin to ag- 
itate. In other words, I say to you, what has been said by au- 
thority of the administration, which I now repeat to you, for it 
contains as much patriotism and good sense as any thing ever 
said by the Father of his country : 

" The President's message, at the opening of the present session of Congress, ex- 
presses fully and plainly his own and the unanimous opinion of all those associated 
■with him in the Executive administration of the Government, in regard to what are 
called the Adjustment or Compromise measures of last session. That opinion is, 
that those measures should be regarded in principle as a final settlement of the 
dangerous and exciting subjects which they embrace ; that though they were not 
free from imperfections, yet, in their mutual dependence and connection, they form- 
ed a system of compromise the most conciliatory and best for the entire country 
that could be obtained from conflicting sectional interests and opinions, and that 
therefore they should be adhered to, until time and experience should demonstrate 
the necessity of further legislation to guard against evasion or abuse. That opin- 
ion, so far as I know, remains entirely unchanged, and will be acted upon steadily 
and decisively. The peace of the country requires this ; the security of the Consti- 
tution requires this ; and every consideration of the public good demands this. If 
tlie Administration cannot stand upon the principles of the message, it does not 
expect to stand at all." — [Daniel Webstek's Letter to the Union Meeting at West- 
chester. 

Now, my friends, that was in point. It came out on the side 
not of the Whig party or of the Democratic party ; but it came 
out on an exigency that arose after the Presidential Election, 
It is the language of patriotism, and I ask you here to-day, if 



18 

there is a man that now hears me, or in Connecticut, that can 
gainsay the wisdom or patriotism of this advice? I say to you, 
and utterly disclaim, that any one denies the rights of petition 
and discussion ; but thousands and tens of thousands say, it is 
patriotic sometimes to withhold the exercise even of our un- 
questioned rights. [Here a man on the upper step of the plat- 
form handed the orator a small piece of manuscript to read. 
Mr. K. said to him, these people (pointing to the large audience) 
must be attended to first. I go for the good of the many. 
(Laughter and cheers.)] 

There is one other topic which, though I fear you are a little 
tired — (cries of " not yet, sir, go on") — I have a little delicacy 
about — it is not entirely new — upon which I will take the lib- 
erty of addressing you. I say I approach it with delicacy — 
because among good men there are conflicting opinions ; I 
know that among good men there are ; but it seems to me that 
if we could explain ourselves, there ought to be no difference 
of opinion. 

I read, a few days ago, the proceedings of a convention of 
divines, held in a neighboring city, (Bridgeport,) a convention 
of Congregational ministers. Now, I say here, with my deep- 
est conviction of its truth, that there is no body of men for 
whom I entertain higher respect than I do for the New Eng- 
land clergy. I know, and God forbid that I, or my children, 
should ever forget that these New England clergymen, in the 
time of trial and difficulty, came up to sustain the people in de- 
fending the cause of Uberty ; (cheers,) and I am prepared to say 
that without them — without their assistance — the cause would 
never have been triumphant. I confess, that if upon any great 
question of public morals I should find my opinions differing 
from the opinions of the New England clergy, I should examine 
and reexamine those opinions with a doubt whether I could be 
ric'ht if opposed to them. I am not of the persuasion or de- 
nomination that assembled at Bridgeport the other day, yet I 
confess that their principles upon great fundamental points are 
right ; and I shall be happy if their heaven shall be my heaven. 
Now, my friends, with these preliminary remarks I shall ap- 
proach the subject. The Constitution declares — " No person 



19 

held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, 
escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or reg- 
ulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor ; but 
shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such ser- 
vice or labor may be due." Now, before I proceed to a dis- 
cussion of this point, will you allow me to state — what may be a 
repetition of what you have heard before — the circumstances 
under which this provision was inserted in the Constitution ? 
Almost every State in this Union recognized, practically, as 
well as theoretically, the institution of slavery at that lime. 
Connecticut had slaves ; New York had slaves ; 1 believe every 
State had them, unless it was Massachusetts, and I think she 
had some. There are men old enough here to remember it ; I 
am not the oldest man present, and I remember it. Nothing 
was more common than for slaves to run away on a frolick or 
otherwise. One hundred men could be found here now who 
can remember cases of slaves going from here to Hartford, or 
to Middletown, or to New London. Did anybody dispute the 
right of their masters at any time to go and bring them back? 
Is there a man here, a divine or layman, that will say a master 
could not go to Middletown and bring back his slaves? Was 
there any man in Middletown to dispute his right ? Would the 
people of Middletown not have said — " Here is your slave ; he 
came here last night to see Sally, (laughter,) and shall go back 
again." I have cases in my mind that occurred in New York, 
in Saratoga county, where I then lived, from which slaves 
escaped to Rensselaer, Albany or Columbia counties. This, I 
say, in 1787 was a perfectly familiar occurrence. Its propriety 
was disputed by no man, clergyman or layman. I have not 
heard that even Quakers disputed it ; if there were any excep- 
tions, they were Quakers. 

That was the state of things at the time of the adoption of 
the Constitution. All that the Constitution meant to say was, 
that if a slave run away from Virginia to Connecticut, the own- 
er in Virginia would have the same right to bring him back 
that the owner in New Haven would have had, at the time of 
the adoption of the Constitution, to bring back his slave which 
had escaped to Hartford in the same State. The resident of 



20 

any one County, in any State, had a conceded right to bring 
back his slave from another County in the same State. This 
same right was, by the Constitution, guarantied to the owner of 
a slave in one State, whose slave had escaped to another State. 
For the purpose of reclaiming fugitive slaves, the whole coun- 
try was one country, and the dilferent States were like the 
County divisions in a separate Slate. 

Long before the adoption of the Federal Constitution, it is 
stated upon the best authority, the colonies of New England 
had a law which provided for giving up fugitive slaves or ser- 
vants escaping from one colony to another colony. Did not 
the Puritan fathers come here imbued with the knowledge, as 
well as the love, of human liberty? I would ask, if I may take 
the liberty to do so, with all respect, the Rev. Mr. Dutton to 
consider these things. With the greatest kindness I would say 
to him, and others of his profession, come, let us reason to- 
gether. It is not worth while to be excited, or angry. No 
doubt every man's conscience must be his own guide, but he 
should endeavor to enlighten it by all the means in his power. 
Let no man talk about his conscience, until he has applied 
his understanding to the subject and tried to ascertain the 
right. (Cheers.) This is not so easily done in the compli- 
cated relations of society ; questions relating to right and duty, 
as citizens of a State, are not always, or often, decided by im- 
pulse ; we are bound, in the investigation of these questions, 
to task our reasoning powei's, to acquire much and varied 
knowledge, and exercise the understandings that God has 
given us. 

Now in the convention that formed the Constitution, thirteen 
independent State sovereignties were represented. These States 
were, for all the purposes of the argument, so many communi- 
ties, each entitled to make laws for its own government. By 
the law of nations, neither of these States could interfere 
with the laws or regulations for the government of any other 
State. This independence of States or nations is best for the 
whole family of mankind. This principle lies at the foundation 
of all progress, all improvement. Each independent State is a 
member of the family of nations. One member of this family 



21 

may have made more progress in intellectual, moral, and social 
improvement, than another; but that does not authorize it to 
prescribe rules of action to its inferior. I am the head of a 
family, and it is a pretty numerous one ; the professors in the 
College situated on this green may know better how to manage 
my family than I do, but I shall not, nevertheless, surrender my 
control of it to any of them. It is my family, and, in the order 
of Providence, it is my right and duty to govern it ; the re- 
sponsibility devolves on me, and that order is best, upon the 
whole, for the human race. 

By the law of nations, each one of the sovereign States was 
authorized to maintain, so long as it chose to maintain, the in- 
stitution of domestic slavery. This institution existed in each 
of the States, and it had long existed. By the same law of na- 
tions, each of these sovereign States was authorized to carry on 
the African slave trade. These were rights which appertained 
to State sovereignty, and which could not rightfully be abolish- 
ed, altered, or abridged, except by the action of the State itself. 
Although this is a recognized principle, yet it may be well to 
fortify it by authority. Chief Justice Shaw, in declaring the 
unanimous opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massa- 
chusetts, in Simm's case, says : — 

" It is too clear and manifest to require proof, that independently of the qualified 
alliance, created by the articles of confederation, which it is conceded contained no 
stipulation on the subject of fugitive slaves, the several States would have been 
sovereign and independent, invested with all the rights and powers, which are re- 
garded by the received laws of nations, as incident to sovereignty. Amongst these, 
is the absolute right of eacli State to regulate by its laws the conduct, state and 
condition of all persons and things within its limits ; to prohibit the entrance of all 
persons, and the introduction of all things, according to its own views of its own 
policy and best good. And each is under a corresponding obligation of respecting 
the territorial rights of others, and of so regulating the conduct of all persons within 
its own territory, as to prohibit them fi cm committing acts of violence or wrong: 
on the territory of others, and prevent them from becoming the asylum for per- 
sons or things injurious to another. Each would have been entitled to defend its 
own rights, and to enforce the performance of these duties from others, by war, and, 
of course, to quahfy and regulate the use and enjoyment of them, by treaties of 
peace, and other mutual compacts. Assuming this to be an outline of the rights' 
and duties of sovereign States towards each other, stated in the briefest and most 
general terms, it becomes necessary to inquire wliat would have been their condition 
in respect to slaves and slavery, supposing that slavery was sanctioned and uphelJ 



22 

by the laws of some, and abolished and prohibited by the laws of others. In doing 
this, it will be necessary to do little more than cite the case of Commonwealth v. 
Aves, 18 Pick. 193, and the laws there cited and commented on. 

" By the received laws of nations it seems to be well established that however 
odious we may consider slavery and the slave trade, however abliorrent to the dic- 
tates of humanity and the plainest principles of justice and natural right, yet each 
nation has a right, in this respect, to judge for itself, and to allow or prohibit slavery 
by its own laws, at is own will ; and that whenever slavery is thus established by 
positive law within the limits of such State, all other nations and people are bound 
to respect it, and cannot rightfully interfere, either by forcibly seizing or artfully 
enticing away slaves, within the limits of the territory of the nation establishing it, 
or on the high seas, which are the common highway of nations. In the case cited, the 
language of this Court is this : In considering the law of nations, we may assume 
that the law of this State is analogous to the law of England in this respect, that 
while slavery is considered as unlawful and inadmissible in both, because contrary 
to natural right and the laws designed for the security of personal liberty, yet, in 
both the existence of slavery in other countries is recognized, and the claims of 
foreigners growing out of that condition are to a certain extent respected." 

Now in the Convention it was suggested that with a view of 
aboHshing the slave trade, each State should, by the Constitu- 
tion, surrender to the general government the power which it 
had to carry on this trade. It was well known that Congress 
would abolish the trade, if it had the power, under the Consti- 
tution, to do so. South Carolina and Georgia, and, it is believ- 
ed, one other Southern State, refused to grant this power. 
They said they would not agree to come into the Union if this 
cession was insisted upon. The controversy was sharp and 
excited, and, at lencrth, it was agreed that Congress should have 
the power after the year 1808. This power was exercised as 
early as it could be by Congress, and the African slave trade 
has therefore been abolished in this country for more than forty 
years Here then humanity has made a great gain by a sur- 
render of one of the sovereign rights of the States. Georgia 
and South Carolina made this surrender, contrary, as they 
asserted, to their own interest. 

In the discussion in the Convention, Mr. Oliver Ellsworth, 
a delegate from this State, afterward Chief Justice of the Uni- 
ted States, said : 

" Let every State import what it pleases. The morality or wisdom of Slavery 
are considerations belonging to the States themselves. What enriches a part, en- 
riches the whole, and the States are the best judges of their particular interest. The 



23 

old confederation had not meddled with this point ; and he did not see any great 
necessity for bringing it within the policy of the new one." — Madison papers, Vol' 
3, p. 1389. 

Mr. Roger Sherman, another name not unknown to Con- 
necticut, or the world, also said : 

" He was for leaving the clause as it stands. He disapproved of the slave trade ; 
yet as the States were now possessed of the right to import slaves, as the public 
good did not require it to be taken from them, and as it was expedient to have as 
few objections as possible to the proposed scheme of government, he thought it best 
to leave the mater as we find it." — Ibid, 1390. 

On the other hand, each State had the sovereign right to de- 
clare every African, or the descendant of an African, within its 
limits, free, whether he resided there, was brought there, or 
escaped from another State, and fled there. Each of these 
States gave up its right to declare a fugitive from another State 
free, but agreed to give him up to his owner, on the claim of 
that owner. Now suppose that the power to carry on the 
African Slave trade was surrendered by the South, in consider- 
ation that the power to give freedom to a fugitive slave should 
be surrendered by the North, was not this agreement for a mu- 
tual surrender of powers, a fair subject for a treaty — could not 
such a treaty be lawfully made between sovereign States ? If 
made, was it " a nefarious bargain," or was it not rather a bargain 
in which humanity clearly gained an advantage ? Certainly it 
was. Provision was made for a termination in these States of 
the African slave trade, and thereby a result, over which hu- 
manity rejoices, has been achieved. The traffic in slaves has 
not only been abolished here, but the influence of the Republic 
has been exerted, and not without success, to abolish it through- 
out the world. Suppose there had been no Constitution formed 
and the States had remained sovereign, and a treaty had been 
negotiated between Maryland and Virginia, in which it was 
stipulated on the part of Virginia to relinquish the slave trade, 
in consideration that Maryland should exclude from its territory 
all runaway slaves from Virginia. This, certainly, would be a 
treaty which the States would have an undoubted right to 
make, and which would be dictated by humanity. 

Considering the provision of the Constitution, to deliver up 



24 

fugitive slaves, in the nature of a treaty, it is a treaty of the 
most solemn obligation, for it has been ratified by the whole 
people. Who then has a right to affirm that the provision is 
contrary to the laws of nature, of nations, or of God ? The 
fact is far otherwise. 

The surrender of Sovereign powers by individual States was, 
as we have seen, dictated by the highest principle of humanity 
— its operation has been greatly beneficial to the cause of hu- 
manity. This arrangement is one of which it may be rever- 
ently affirmed, that the Ruler of the Universe approved ; for 
by a concession, unexceptionable itself, that traffic, which was a 
disgrace to Christendom, has been terminated in these United 
States. 

Now if the stipulation to deliver up fugitives from service 
was one which the States had a right to make, and not only so, 
was wise and humane in itself, it is certainly binding upon the 
States respectively, and if binding upon the States, it must be 
binding upon every citizen of the State. This follows of neces- 
sity — what enlightened conscience then, can prompt disobedi- 
ence to this provision of the Constitution ? That enactment 
which God approved. His children will obey — not only obey, 
but see that it is fulfilled. Their conscience will compel obe- 
dience. 

I have said that the provision referred to, is in the nature of 
a treaty ? What are the obligations of a treaty ? We have 
some little information on this point in that Book, with the 
contents of which, to their honor be it spoken, the people 
of Connecticut are familiar. In the days of Joshua, the great 
general of the Israelites, a treaty was made between this 
people and the Gibeonites. The latter, fearful that their 
utter destruction was near at hand, came to Joshua and told 
him that they came from a far country — that when they set 
out from their homes, their shoes, now worn out, were new, 
and their bread, now mouldy, was fresh from the oven, and 
they desired to enter into a league with him. "And Joshua 
made peace with them, and made a league with them to let 
them live : and the prince of the congregation sware unto 
them. And it came to pass at the end of three days, after they 



25 

liad made a league with them, that they heard that they were 
tlieir neighbors, and that they dwelt among them. And the 
children of Israel jom'neyed, and came into their cities on the 
third day. And the children of Israel smote them not, because 
the princes of the congregation had sworn unto them by the 
Lord God of Israel, And all the congregation murmured 
against the princes. But all the princes said unto all the con- 
gregation, we have sworn unto them, now therefore we may 
not touch them." But Israel made them bondsmen, hewers of 
wood and drawers of water, but he spared their lives. Now it 
happened several hundred years after this transaction, in the 
days of David, King of Israel, that there was a sore famine in 
the land of Israel, and David inquired of the Lord what it 
meant. " And the Lord answered him, it is for Saul, and for 
his bloody house, because he slew the Giheonites. And the king 
called the Gibeonites, and said unto them : (now the Gibeonites 
were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the 
Amorites ; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them : 
and Saul sought to slay them, in his zeal to the children of 
Israel and Judah.) " Wherefore David said unto the Gibeon- 
ites : What shall I do for you ? and wherewith shall I make the 
atonement, that ye may bless the inheritancy of the Lord ? 
And the Gibeonites said unto him, we will have no silver nor 
gold of Saul, nor of his house ; neither for us shalt thou kill 
any man in Israel. And he said, what ye shall say, that will I 
do for you. And they answered the king, the man that con- 
sumed us, and that devised against us, that we should be de- 
stroyed from remaining in any of the coasts of Israel, let seven 
men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them 
unto the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, whom the Lord did choose. 
And the King said, I will give them." 

Here is a most instructive passage of inspired history, on the 
solemn obligations of a treaty, made by the princes of the 
people, but in the case under consideration, the treaty was 
made by the princes of the people, and afterwards deliberately 
and solemnly considered and ratified by the people themselves. 
Shall " the people murmur" and say that their consciences will 
not allow them to keep the solemn compact ? 

4 



26 

Nothing has been said, you will observe, fellow citizens, 
about any other provisions in the Constitution, except those 
which relate to the slavery of the African race. I might speak 
of others, such as advantages conceded to our coasting trade 
and foreign comn:ierce. I have chosen to regard the cession of 
State sovereignty by means of which the -slave trade was abol- 
ished, as a consideration for a like cession by which a fugitive 
slave could not be emancipated, but must be given up. There 
were doubtless other considerations entering into the compact ; 
indeed, the perfect propriety of giving up fugitive slaves was 
never for a moment disputed either in the General Convention 
or in the State Conventions, so far as I know. 

The people of the United States, in providing for the delivering 
up of fugitive slaves, did not suppose that the States regarded 
each other as foreign, much less hostile, but they were sister 
republics, united together for general purposes under one federal 
head. 

Great efforts have been made to excite prejudice against the 
fugitive slave law. It has been represented that every man 
may be compelled, under this law, to pursue and apprehend a 
runaway slave. It is true that every man in the community 
may be required to assist in the execution of the law, if the 
officers appointed to execute it are interfered with in the dis- 
charge of their duty. This is a fundamental principle of our 
law. Every executive officer of the law, in the discharge of 
his duties, acts as the agent of the people : the people command 
him. If he is obstructed — opposed by force — it is right that 
they who command him should come to his assistance, for every 
precept of the law, whether to attach property or to arrest a 
citizen, in a civil or a criminal proceeding, must be executed. 
This is essential to the very existence of civil society. Al- 
though this principle has been always incorporated in the law 
of Connecticut, and of every other State, yet probably there is 
not a man who hears me, who has ever actually been called 
upon in his private capacity to give his personal aid to the ex- 
ecution of a law. Means the most unfair have been resorted 
to, to render this law odious, and to prevent its execution. Is 
this right, gentlemen ? Will you allow it ? Every good citizen 



27 

is bound to see this and every other law of the land fairly exe- 
cuted. What apology has any citizen of this country for a dis- 
obedience of law ? Here laws are enacted by the people them- 
selves ; they are the expressed will of a majority of the com- 
munity. Indeed, everybody admits that the law must be su- 
preme ; even the opponents of the fugitive slave law acknowl- 
edge their obligation to submit to law, but some of them have 
discovered a " higher law," not written in the Constitution or 
the Statute book. Well, prove the existence of higher law, by 
fair argument, and I doubt not the law of the land will be made 
to conform to it. Its existence, I think, is far from being proved 
in the present case. 

Now, fellow citizens, shall it be charged that, because we ad- 
vance these doctrines, and employ these arguments, we are the 
friends of slavery, or the slave trade ? Certainly not. Con- 
necticut and New York abolished slavery as soon as they could, 
in moderation, and with a view to their own interest, and the 
interest of the slave. But we have no right , to interfere with 
slavery in South Corolina and Georgia, any more than we have 
to interfere with it in the Spanish dominions. If we were resi- 
dents of those States, the case would be different; then we 
should have a right to act according to our sense of propriety, 
under all the circumstances. Indeed, I am of the opinion ex- 
pressed by a distinguished Jurist in Massachusetts, (Mr. Choate,) 
that we have less right to interfere with the institution of do- 
mestic slavery, where it is established in our sister States, than 
we have to interfere with it in a foreign country. For among 
ourselves, we are not only under an obligation to let each State 
manage this institution in its own way, and according to its 
own sense of right, but impliedly such control must be without 
being subject to irritating and exasperating annoyances from 
the inhabitants of sister States. 

My friends, the people of these United States have entered 
into a compact ; the whole bargain was made together, and its 
obligation is of the most binding character. It has done more 
to advance the happiness of man than any other that was ever 
made. It has done more for the comfort and elevation of the 
people than any form of government that ever existed before. 



28 

All this is to be undone because there are men so much wiser 
than Washington, and Franklin, and Hamilton, and Madison, 
and Roger Sherman, and Oliver Ellsworth, that they have found 
out that the Constitution of the United States is against the 
law of God, and must not be enforced. Do you believe it ? 
(Cries of "no," "no.") 

No enlightened conscience can view this subject on a great 
scale — on a scale commensurate with the affairs of mankind — 
and come to the conclusion, that any part of the Constitution 
of the United States imposes obligations which honest men 
cannot perform. There is, my friends, a great deal of dust cast 
upon this subject — a great deal of extraneous matter brought 
in, and, among others, is this : " Am I going," says one, " to be 
a slave catcher, do you think ? Can any law of the land make 
me a slave catcher ?" I might as well say — " do you think any 
law of the land can make me take my neighbor's cattle, or his 
household goods, or his person for a debt due another neigh- 
bor ?" Why, I should say, " please excuse me ;" yet still an ex- 
igency might exist, as we have before seen, which would render 
my services necessary in executing the precept of the law. 

Fellow Citizens — It is important that we discriminate justly 
and wisely, betwixt our rights and correlative duties as mem- 
bers of the separate States, and our rights and duties as mem- 
bers of the United States. As citizens of a State, we may 
legislate for our social, intellectual, and moral improvement ; as 
citizens of the United States, we are confined to limits pre- 
scribed by the Constitution, which we ought by no means to 
transgress. Among the powers which the people of a State 
may exercise, is that of the abolition of slavery ; many States 
have exercised this power, and if, by this act, they have in- 
creased their own prosperity, multiplied their population, built 
up cities and villages, established and maintained common 
schools and higher institutions of learning, their example can- 
not fail to have a salutary influence upon sister States in which 
slavery yet exists ; but beyond the exercise of this influence, no 
State has aright to go. There can be no employment of force, 
no resort to stratagems, no open or secret assaults, to abolish 
slavery in another State. Independent States are naturally 



29 

jealous of any foreign interference with their domestic institu- 
tions ; example may lead them, but force cannot drive them. 

What are called the free States have emancipated by law, 
but there has been also a great amount of emancipation in what 
are called the slave States. It has been stated on the authority 
of a learned Presbyterian divine, that the value of the slaves 
emancipated in those States by private persons, influenced 
solely by a sense of duty, exceeds in amount the whole sum 
paid by the British Government to purchase the freedom of all 
the slaves in her West India Islands. 

I fear I have been too tedious, (cries of " not at all," "go on.") 
I thought I would converse with you freely, and tell the whole 
story. I have not come to dictate to anybody ; I came to 
reason with you, and will conclude by asking — Can we do 
any thing better than to sustain, in all its provisions, the Consti- 
tution of the Government under which we live ? (Cries of 
" no.") Who can point out any thing, which has worked or 
will work better ? Shall we try the experiment of dissolution ? 
Where will it land us ? I believe that if we were to dissolve 
the Union to-day, the revolution itself would cease to be a 
blessing. I doubt whether it would be better for mankind that 
it ever occurred. I know that the glory of Washington, and 
of all the great men who fought the battles of liberty, and were 
engaged in constructing this government, would perish from 
off the earth. It would be all gone, and all worse than nothing 
for the great cause of liberty and mankind. 

H this be so, how shall we preserve this Constitution ? Why, 
we must preserve it in one way only, and that is the way 
recommended over and over again, in the extracts I have read 
to you from the writings of the Father of his country, and 
which you will find multiplied abundantly, if you will look into 
his letters. Cultivate kindly feelings ; treat Southern and 
Western men as fellow citizens and brethren. Do not revive 
the feeling over which Washington lamented, and which came 
near to preventing the formation of the Constitution. How 
can we expect this government to succeed, if we do not repress 
those feelings of jealousy and irritation, which belong only to 
hostile nations ? 



30 

True, we have slavery here ; we have three miUions of slaves 
in the country. Who does not deplore its existence ? We of 
this generation are not responsible for bringing these slaves 
here. One of the causes of complaint in the Instrument you 
have heard read to-day, is, that they were brought here by a 
tyrannical government without our consent. But here they are, 
here they are — and what shall we do with them ? If they 
should receive a fiat to-day — "be free, and take care of your- 
selves" — what would be the consequence ? In my judgment, 
their utter ruin, and eventually, their extinction. They are 
here, and what is their condition ? Better, far better, than any 
three millions of their race and nation in the world. Shall we 
on their account destroy this united government ? Will they 
gain any thing by it ? Will the white population gain by it ? 

Let us discharge our duty as American citizens, and no doubt 
ours is the country which is to redeem Europe, Asia, and Af- 
rica too. 

(The orator took his seat and three tremendous cheers were 
given him, and three others for the Constitution and the Union.) 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011783 133 4 « 



